Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The IOC's 'Clean Venue' Policy

michael posted about 10 years ago | from the consume dept.

The Almighty Buck 549

Dave21212 writes "Yes folks, the International Olympic Committee's 'Brand Protection Team' will be protecting against the threat of Advertising Terrorism at the games. According to an MSNBC article, the IOC's Karen Webb states 'Our role is to protect all of our sponsor categories and actively monitor ambush activity.' Restricted items include, flags, umbrellas, shirts, hats, and bags with trademarks of rival sponsors. Unofficial brands can be confiscated and with only Coke allowed on Olympic grounds, this brings new meaning to The Pepsi Challenge!"

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

GNAA (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10037929)

B>GNAA announces hostile takeover of Electronic Arts
Zeikfried - Reuters, Nigeria.
In a hushed press conference held at the GNAA compound in blackest Nigeria, the cream of the journalistic crop from IGN, Gamespot, Gamespy and various other overpriced ad-infested shitholes gathered from across 4 continents to witness what has been described as the most shocking announement of the post-E3 market. The purchase of a controlling stock of industry leading publisher Electronic Arts by the increasingly aggressive venture capitalists of the GNAA.
After keeping the illiterate troglodytes waiting for several hours, leading GNAA members Timecop, Penisbird and goat-see, along with Electronic Arts president and CEO John Riccitiello, pulled up in the specially commisioned GNAA Limo, now fully armoured to protect from the ever present threat of terrorism from zionist #politics oppers. All four were, as usual, stark naked due to the searing Nigerian heat, and were instantly greeted by a cacophony of flashbulbs and excited chatter from the wretched sodomites and college dropouts that populate the world of gaming, including a shower from the furiously masturbating IGN editor Matt Cassamassina.
"This is a new day for Electronic Arts" exploded the now fully erect Riccitiello, "and a new day for the Gay Nigger Association of America. Now no longer will the significant Gay Nigger minority be ignored by the racist cartels and Japanese Xenophobes that hold a tight noose on the gaming industry."
Shortly afterwards, following a brutal anal violation by nordic Gay Nigger DiKKy, the now broken and bleeding John Riccitiello was replaced by the newly appointed head of the GNAAs gaming devision, Zeikfried Tuvai.
"This change is no mere financial step, or a changing of the guard, this will be an absolute fucking revolution. Work on our titles has already begun, I shit you not."
Tragically the conference was then cut short by a failed assassination attempt on the GNAA leadership by efnet #politcs opper and known fascist paedophile "Pickle", who was quickly disarmed by GNAA security and silenced by a large black phallus. However a press release has been issued to Reuters and the Associated Press, and is as follows:

Shitflood Gaia (GC/PS2/Xbox) Q4 2004 - A management sim, where the otaku scum of internet have gathered into a single drinking hole for quick extermination. The player must control his assets wisely to gain the maximum number of bites from the unsuspecting and unintelligent regulars in order to max out his LastMeasure meter and gain access to his most potent weapon, floodphpbb.

Americas Army - Operation #politics (PC (Windows Only)) Q4 2004 - GNAA/EA and the armed forces of the United States of America unite to bring the reality of the T.W.A.T to your Windows box this Christmas. This third-person shooter throws you in charge of the GNAA efnet black ops, as you struggle against corrupt IRC operators, Mossad agents, Nick Berg's head and eventually FreeTrade himself in an explosive struggle in the name of freedom and democracy.

Penisbird's Cock Perch Panic (GBA) Q1 2005 - A coup by OSDN shock troops threatens to overthrow the President, defeat the unwashed scum by guiding Penisbird onto their prone member, disarming them once and for all. As you move through the levels you must dodge traps laid by the increasingly desperate CmdrTaco, including CowboyNeal himself. Can you dodge his sentient rolls of lard to perch on CowboyNeal's notoriously miniscule penis? Find out for yourself in 2005!

About EA:
Electronic Arts (EA) is the world's leading independent developer and publisher of interactive entertainment software for personal computers and advanced entertainment systems such as the PlayStation®2 Computer Entertainment System, the PlayStation®, Xbox(TM) video game console from Microsoft, the Nintendo GameCube(TM) and the Game Boy® Advance. Since its inception, EA has garnered more than 700 awards for outstanding software in the U.S. and Europe.
EA markets its products worldwide under four brand logos and has over 33 product franchises that have reached more than a million unit sales worldwide.
EA headquarters is located in Redwood City, California

About GNAA:
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which
gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

Are you GAY [] ?
Are you a NIGGER [] ?
Are you a GAY NIGGER [] ?

If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America. You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

First, you have to obtain a copy of GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE [] and watch it.

Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA "first post" on [] , a popular "news for trolls" website

Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!

If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is Niggernet, and you can connect to as our official server. If you do not have an IRC client handy, you are free to use the GNAA Java IRC client by clicking here [] .

If you have mod points and would like to support GNAA, please moderate this post up.

| ______________________________________._a,____ |
| _______a_._______a_______aj#0s_____aWY!400.___ |
| __ad#7!!*P____a.d#0a____#!-_#0i___.#!__W#0#___ |
| _j#'_.00#,___4#dP_"#,__j#,__0#Wi___*00P!_"#L,_ |
| _"#ga#9!01___"#01__40,_"4Lj#!_4#g_________"01_ |
| ________"#,___*@`__-N#____`___-!^_____________ |
| _________#1__________?________________________ |
| _________j1___________________________________ |
| ____!4yaa#l___________________________________ |
| ______-"!^____________________________________ | This logo is (C) 2003, 2004 GNAA []
` _______________________________________________'

(C) GNAA 2004


I, for one, welcome our new IOC overlords (-1, Offtopic)

christurkel (520220) | about 10 years ago | (#10037932)


First Post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10037934)

Ohh yea.. Thats right.. First post...

Bottles without labels? (5, Interesting)

o0zi (652605) | about 10 years ago | (#10037936)

Did anyone besides me notice that all the gymnasts who had their own bottles with them had had the labels taken off? It seems a little overkill for "advertising terrorism"...

Re:Bottles without labels? (3, Interesting)

MikeXpop (614167) | about 10 years ago | (#10037984)

That happens everywhere, and I mean _everywhere_.

A few years back I used to watch professional wrestling, and there was a wrestler named Triple H. Anyway, when he came on stage, he would take a swig of water and spray it in the air. The water bottle always had its label taken off. Anyway, one time he came out with a labelled water bottle. It was in New York, and green, so I instantly recognized it as Poland Springs. However when they zoomed in on him, the bottle was blurred. I thought that was kind of funny.

I guess they didn't want to be accused of supporting one water company over another or something. But this doesn't just happen in the Olympics.

Re:Bottles without labels? (4, Insightful)

randyest (589159) | about 10 years ago | (#10038032)

Did they do the same to members of that audience? If not, this is worse.

From TFA: We have to protect official sponsors who have paid millions to make the Olympics happen.

Silly me. I thought it was the that made the Olympics happen.

But that's only true if you think the competition is more important than the fancy pre-shows and fireworks. I guess now it's reversed -- the competitions are ancillary, the sponsors and ads are the main event now.

Which is why I don't watch it. My wife does. But she's not as jaded as I am (yet.)

Re:Bottles without labels? (1)

randyest (589159) | about 10 years ago | (#10038056)

dropped word, of course I meant:

Silly me. I thought it was the athletes that made the Olympics happen.

Re:Bottles without labels? (1)

Sukh (620783) | about 10 years ago | (#10038053)

Here in the UK, broadcasters generally don't censor brands on-screen. However, lots of programmes from the US have bits censored just about everywhere. For example, take some of the programmes on MTV like Jackass or The Osbournes. Initially I thought it was just to censor rude words or nudity... but it obviously wasn't. British MTV programmes don't have the same level of censorship.
It actually gets very annoying after a while. Especially when you're not used to it.

Gold Medals or Golden Rule ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10037940)

He who has the gold makes the rules ?

host the olympics or host the corporations? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10037942)

now the olympics is officially corrupt.

Frightening (4, Interesting)

Lord_Dweomer (648696) | about 10 years ago | (#10037943)

So, I didn't RTFA of course, but from the story blurb it makes it sound like if you wear something like an Adidas shirt for example, and Nike is a sponsor and Adidas is not, they will confiscate it. Frankly, I would flat out refuse. This is so ridiculous and is a perfect example of where our culture is going.

Now, fast forward 10 years and imagine that SWAT-like team practicing on the stadium, but instead of looking for actual terrorist threats, they're looking for banned advertising. Think I'm joking? Well, just accellerate current corporate greed and how much power corporations wield, and I think I'm pretty close to the truth.

Re:Frightening (1)

DrEldarion (114072) | about 10 years ago | (#10037983)

Oh, just wait until we get our equivalent of the Shiawase Decision.

(I hope that wasn't too obscure...)

The future is looking more and more Dickian (1)

Mr. Neutron (3115) | about 10 years ago | (#10037990)

(as in Philip K.)

It won't be long before the only way you can afford an apartment is to have advertisers "sponsor" your walls, blanketing them with adverising. As part of your contract, you will no longer be allowed to display competetors' products, or be found in breach of contract and jailed.

Re:Frightening (2, Insightful)

wideBlueSkies (618979) | about 10 years ago | (#10038028)

So I guess that if in 2012 when I'm attending the 'Microsoft Olympics' in New York City, if I wear my Red Hat Baseball cap, I can expect someone from the NYC Police "atlas squad" (antiterrorism special force) to blow my head off.


Re:Frightening (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10038033)

BushCo will get ideas from this. "Today, I, as a proud patriotic american, am proud to announce Affluent, White, God-fearing conservatives to be the official people of the united states."

Re:Frightening (1)

Aphelion (13231) | about 10 years ago | (#10038042)

You'll just have to turn it inside out.

Re:Frightening (5, Insightful)

kfg (145172) | about 10 years ago | (#10038060)

Of course the problem comes in the fact that many of the athletes rely on personal sponsors to compete at all; and if you're sponsored by Adidas but have to wear a Nike shirt or no shirt at all, well, you go without the Adidas money you need to train and compete because there's nothing in the deal for Adidas.

The organizers end up with all the loot, the competitors themselves are left out in the cold.

This a big deal in NASCAR right now, what with Coke sponsoring events and cars sponsored by Pepsi winning races and vice versa.

It's a fucking mess.


Re:Frightening (2, Insightful)

thedillybar (677116) | about 10 years ago | (#10038061)

>So, I didn't RTFA of course...
>Well, just accellerate current corporate greed and how much power corporations wield...

If you RTFA you would know that it has little to do with corporate greed, and lots to do with making the Olympics possible. Without sponsors, the Olympic games simply wouldn't have enough funding to go on. Are you going to donate some cash (or vote to use some tax dollars) to give more to the Olympics? Even if you do, others won't. They're trying to protect their sponsors, just like the free web providers do by not allowing you to show your own banner ads. It sounds like they might be going a bit far, but they have to do something to protect their sponsors or else they'll lose their funding.

Re:Frightening (5, Insightful)

randyest (589159) | about 10 years ago | (#10038107)

Without sponsors, the Olympic games simply wouldn't have enough funding to go on.

Are you serious?

If this isn't a troll, then you've lost touch a bit. The Olympics are supposed to be about international athletic competetion. Not million-dollar stage shows with fireworks and robotic Greek gods flying around. None of that adds to the real spectacle, IMHO, and none of the games requires expensive equipment or locales.

The article said Coke spent $60M, VISA another $30M, something like $120M from just the major sponsors.

You could have a perfectly excellent Olympics for a tenth or less of that. An acceptable Olympics (to most) for under a million.

The athletes want to compete, not be whores for some commercial concern (at least until after they win.)

Re:Frightening (1)

mobby_6kl (668092) | about 10 years ago | (#10038080)

>So, I didn't RTFA of course

Go RTFA. From the article:
"A row of people all wearing the same logo at an Olympic venue - hoping to get on television - might be ambush marketing on a small scale."
"The measures were aimed at "groups drawing attention to themselves" they said.

I don't like this, but mainly they want to prevent lets say Pepsi from paying 20 people in the front row to hold a huge Pepsi flag or something. At least I hope that's the idea.

Re:Frightening (4, Interesting)

linuxtelephony (141049) | about 10 years ago | (#10038093)

I lived in Atlanta in 1992, 4 years before the 1996 Olympics there. The IOC was going around nailing anybody with ANYTHING remotely like "Olympic" in their company name or product. One example, Olympian Pools, or something like that.

That, combined with all of the corruption (remember the fall out from Utah and Japan not too long ago), and the flat-out censorship of participants (athletes are not able to keep blogs, and somewhere I think they were restricted from writing their personal experiences even after the games, if the IOC doesn't get its cut), not to mention the many other layers of crap reported earlier here on /., are all reasons why I don't even bother tuning in.

I stopped watching, paying attention, or even caring about the Olympics after I saw what they did in Atlanta.

Judging by the dismal ticket sales, perhaps this is a growing trend.

Anyone else switching off in the UK? (4, Interesting)

FyRE666 (263011) | about 10 years ago | (#10037944)

Is anyone else deliberately NOT watcing the Olympics in light of this corporate assholery? I'm in the UK, where we're not being censored, but I'm not going to encourage the corporate ad campaign that's masquerading as a sports event by tuning in.

The funny thing is, that previous stories posted here about China's restrictions, firewalling off any sites promoting freedom of speech etc have evoked harsh criticism of the regime. This is no different though, except the control isn't in the hands of a political party, but a few greedy corporations.

I can't believe that after charging people to come and watch the games, they're now telling them what to eat, drink, wear and think while there. I'd ask for my money back; no actually I'd ask for payment for them employing me as some fucking walking advert.

No wonder attendance is only just hovering above 50% this year, even though it's in Athens. Seems like people don't like "controlled fun"... Funny that...

Re:Anyone else switching off in the UK? (5, Interesting)

christurkel (520220) | about 10 years ago | (#10037981)

The corporations the the big networks have sucked all the joy of the Olympics. I can't watch them. Its like an informercial with breaks for sporting invites; its insane and out of control.

The costs of putting on the Olympics have increased so much that only the largest cities can afford to host them then only with massive corporate sponsorship. Disgusting and sad.

It isn't corporation's fault (4, Insightful)

John Jorsett (171560) | about 10 years ago | (#10038023)

Don't blame corporations for doing what they're programmed in their very DNA to do: turn a profit. Blame the Olympics for whoring themselves out for the corporate dollars. If you recall, the IOC had two members who took over $1 million to bring the 2002 games to Salt Lake City. Would it be a surprise if that's just the tip of the iceberg, and that there's major bribery of IOC members taking place on a continual basis? Corporations may be the johns, but it's the Olympics who's the streetwalker.

Re:It isn't corporation's fault (1)

aj50 (789101) | about 10 years ago | (#10038070)

Odd that for a supposedly "amateur" competition.

But eh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10038072)

Without the corporations there would not be bribery ;-)

I am (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10038058)

Switching off in Finland. I want to see a festival of sports, and not some corporate ass-fucking. So, no thanks, keep your I'm Lovin' It Crappy Meals and Coca Colas.

Re:Anyone else switching off in the UK? (1)

Tx (96709) | about 10 years ago | (#10038078)

I must say I've watched a fair few events, and I can't actually name one sponsors brand from the games, so I don't think the advertising is too in-your-face. Plus no commercial breaks on the BBC, which overall makes it seem less commercialised than a typical televised sporting event.

I don't really care what they do to suckers^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hpeople who actually travel to watch the games in person, they're kind of asking for it.

Re:Anyone else switching off in the UK? (2, Insightful)

thedillybar (677116) | about 10 years ago | (#10038096)

>Is anyone else deliberately NOT watcing the Olympics in light of this corporate assholery?

If this is enough reason to convince you not to watch the Olympics, you clearly had little desire to watch in the first place. These are the best athletes of today, and being an athlete myself, I don't see how you could not watch them compete.

>No wonder attendance is only just hovering above 50% this year, even though it's in Athens. Seems like people don't like "controlled fun"... Funny that...

You're out of your mind. You really think people say to themselves "well, I would go to the Olympics, but I can't wear my Adidas shirt...maybe in 4 years..."? Come on.

Re:Anyone else switching off in the UK? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10038111)

I've been saying the same thing for years about movies. I don't pay $9 to go watch a movie just to see commercials. Oh wait--I do. (or, well, used to...)

So much for freedom, sports, and everything nice (1)

setzman (541053) | about 10 years ago | (#10037946)

Shouldn't the games be about that stuff instead of selling out to the sponsors? Oh, wait, this is the real world, where even world politics is part of the games-one of the latest was the Iranian incident.

Re:So much for freedom, sports, and everything nic (1)

thedillybar (677116) | about 10 years ago | (#10038110)

>Oh, wait, this is the real world, where even world politics is part of the games...

This is one of the few events where so many countries in the world come together. Of course politics is involved. How could it not be?

But what about the spectators? (2, Interesting)

keiferb (267153) | about 10 years ago | (#10037948)

What I didn't get from the article is whether or not this applies only to employees/volunteers or if it extends to the spectators, as well. If I show up with a vintage 1986 Spuds MacKenzie t-shirt and the official beer of the games is Rolling Rock, do I get tossed? Subjected to "additional security measures"? Or do they just not care?

If the latter, could someone loosen my tin foil a bit?

Re:But what about the spectators? (2, Informative)

Nos. (179609) | about 10 years ago | (#10038031)

From what I understand, this applies to EVERYONE. They were talking about it on the radio here yesterday. If you're heading to the games, make sure you don't have a Pepsi logo (or pick other competitor to official sponsor) on your clothes, bags, and make sure you don't have one of their products. Hmmm, since VISA is an official sponsor, I wonder if you can pay for anything with your Master Card/Discover/Amex/etc.

Re:But what about the spectators? (1)

keiferb (267153) | about 10 years ago | (#10038097)

No, I don't think you can. I've seen Visa commercials saying just that - your other plastic is no good.

Refreshing Coke (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10037949)

One would that that coke would be the last thing a athlte would want in his/her system ;)

Re:Refreshing Coke (1, Offtopic)

tarquin_fim_bim (649994) | about 10 years ago | (#10038037)

Insightful? Is that because there isn't an unintelligible selection?

Anyway while I'm here.
For the latest REAL News For Nerds - checkout The Register [] . It's way better than /.

Is that the kind of thing we're talking about?

So the alternative to "advertising terrorism" is (3, Interesting)

Mr. Neutron (3115) | about 10 years ago | (#10037952)

advertising fascism?

To their credit, they are hardly the first governing body to respond to the spectre of terrorism with a crackdown on civil liberties ;-).

Re:So the alternative to "advertising terrorism" i (3, Funny)

Eudial (590661) | about 10 years ago | (#10038075)

Ein OS, Ein Schtadium, ein uh, advertising? =P

Rats (5, Funny)

tirefire (724526) | about 10 years ago | (#10037957)

Now I can't wear my Al-Qaeda baseball cap.

Ok, its way out of hand now.. (4, Interesting)

nurb432 (527695) | about 10 years ago | (#10037958)

This insanity needs to be stopped.

First they spend 1.5 Billion to invasively spy on EVERYONE there...

Then athletes cant talk about the games, or take pictures.. For fear of not getting their take of the revenue..

Now fans cant even choose what food they eat, unless its a 'sponsored' product?

The entire Olympic games have become a commercialized farce, and needs to be disbanded.

Its a mockery of what it should be about: athletes competing for the title of 'best'. Nothing more, nothing less.

Re:Ok, its way out of hand now.. (1)

Kohath (38547) | about 10 years ago | (#10037989)

So don't watch or participate and your problem is solved.

Re:Ok, its way out of hand now.. (2, Insightful)

randyest (589159) | about 10 years ago | (#10038125)

I neither watch nor participate, but my "problem" isn't solved.

I can no longer watch the Olympics like I used to.

I want the old, pre-sell-out Olyompics back, thanks.

Re:Ok, its way out of hand now.. (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | about 10 years ago | (#10038024)

Most of the stuff you say is true, but if you read up on whether the atheletes can't talk about the games or take pictures, it is just that they can't do it for news companies.

Even so, this whole thing stinks rotten. It shouldn't be about money so much (though stuff needs to be paid for), or loading up on potentially dangerous chemicals

Re:Ok, its way out of hand now.. (1)

FIRESTORM_v1 (567651) | about 10 years ago | (#10038091)

Unfortunately it's worse than what you describe.

Olympians are not allowed to write in their own personal journals about what's going on at the Games for fear of disqualification..

from CNN's own article on the issue []

Participants in the games may respond to written questions from reporters or participate in online chat sessions -- akin to a face-to-face or telephone interview -- but they may not post journals or online diaries, blogs in Internet parlance, until the Games end August 29.

Re:Ok, its way out of hand now.. (1)

An ominous Cow art (320322) | about 10 years ago | (#10038049)

Its a mockery of what it should be about: athletes competing for the title of 'best'. Nothing more, nothing less.

And that's exactly what it should be: athletes competing, not nations or $%^&ing corporations.

Athletes boycot the olympics (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10037960)

Some major atheletes (like Kim Clijsters) don't go to the olympics because their contract with other sponsors (Fila in her case) doesn't allow so.

Wow... (0, Troll)

Steamhead (714353) | about 10 years ago | (#10037963)

I am shocked and appalled.

OK, it's official (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10037966)

The Olympics are now nothing more than another way for corporations to get people's attention in order to view advertisements.

Not that big of a deal... (2, Insightful)

Doches (761288) | about 10 years ago | (#10037967)

The Olympics have always been heavily commercialized; Making that a little (well ok, a lot) more exclusive doesn't really change much. Would a sponsor-free Olympics really be any better? Could it even happen?

this is stupid (3, Insightful)

Ravenrage (739755) | about 10 years ago | (#10037969)

I am so sick of people using the "terrorism" tag to do what ever they want....are we sure that gwbIII isn't involved with the Olympics???...
plz i mean "Advertising Terrorism"??? horseshit...

The Olympic Charter (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10037970)

From the IOC website:

What is the goal of the Olympic Movement?

According to the Olympic Charter, established by Pierre de Coubertin, the goal of the Olympic Movement is to contribute to building a peaceful and better world by educating youth through sport practised without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play.
I think it's long overdue for a rewrite.

Re:The Olympic Charter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10038019)

Has been since about 1980, I believe.

Re:The Olympic Charter (4, Insightful)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | about 10 years ago | (#10038025)

What is the goal of the Olympic Movement?

According to the Olympic Charter, established by Pierre de Coubertin, the goal of the Olympic Movement is to contribute to building a peaceful and better world by educating youth through sport practised without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play.

According to the Olympic Charter (rev 1), established by Major Sponsors, the goal of the Olympic Movement is to contribute to corporate profits peaceful and better brand recognition by advertising to youth through sport practised without competitors images of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires major contributions with a spirit of exclusivity, frequent advertisments and no fair use.

Re:The Olympic Charter (3, Funny)

Esion Modnar (632431) | about 10 years ago | (#10038026)

without discrimination of any kind

Yeah, unless you're wearing a Pepsi shirt...

I, for one, welcome our new corporate overlords. No, wait... no i don't.

Going to Olympics is like riding with Hitler! (4, Insightful)

John Jorsett (171560) | about 10 years ago | (#10037974)

Is it me or are the Olympics taking on the tone of a totalitarian regime? If the restrictions on the athletes (no blogs, no 'unapproved' products, etc.) were being imposed by a government, there'd be an outcry. Because a non-governmental entity is doing it, it's ok?

Re:Going to Olympics is like riding with Hitler! (1)

Neomar (773009) | about 10 years ago | (#10038055)

I don't think that the IOC is responsible for this. I guess that they are forced to restrict the brands by the sponsors who give them money and forbid the blogs for the networks which pay awesome sums for being able to show the olympic games. Of course they could allow the athletes to drink openly pepsi cola or whatever, but then they would be sued by coca cola and not receive anything. It is once again the corporates fault ;) Money is vital for them, because the organisation and the new buildings every time are rather expensive. You could reduce the costs if you keep the olympic games always in the same country, but this is not feasible because of national pride reasons. In the USA they didn't even manage to keep it in the same state ( los angeles 1984, atlanta 1996)

Re:Going to Olympics is like riding with Hitler! (1)

Aphelion (13231) | about 10 years ago | (#10038057)

Well, a lot of the money is coming from the Greek government. So the government could excersize some demands for liberty in exchange for the infusion, but it seems that they haven't done that. So, it being a private enterprise, the IOC could deny you for any reason, even taboo ones (race, nationality.)

Re:Going to Olympics is like riding with Hitler! (1)

st0rmshad0w (412661) | about 10 years ago | (#10038063)

Well the Olympic rings symbol was a fabrication of NAZI archeologists, and the torch relay was created to make Hitler's games a spectacle....

And yet somehow they endure.

Re:Going to Olympics is like riding with Hitler! (1)

Neomar (773009) | about 10 years ago | (#10038126)

This is not true.. The olympic rings first appeared in the Paris magazine "Le Bon Marche" in 1913 and it was approved at the Olympic Congress in 1914. So its a french thing...

Re:Going to Olympics is like riding with Hitler! (5, Informative)

perrin (891) | about 10 years ago | (#10038088)

That is not so surprising when you consider who runs the show. the previous and long-time IOC president, Samaranch, was a fascist. I don't just mean that as en call-name. He was a member of fascist organizations for 40 years, was an ardent supporter of Franco and was appointed government secretary for sports under Franco's fascist dictatorship.

The IOC is not democratic nor accountable to anyone, and have always operated in a totally autocratic manner.

(An a less important but symbolic aside: The torch-carrying tradition was invented by Nazi Germany, who used the games held in Germany 1936 as a huge propaganda event.)

The games have also been connected to commercial interest since the start. For example, the games in 1900 and 1904 were both side-by-side with large trade fairs.

My Rights Online (4, Insightful)

Kohath (38547) | about 10 years ago | (#10037977)

I hope this doesn't infringe my rights online somehow.

Re:My Rights Online (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10038041)

Let's just change the section name to Someone Else's Rights Offline and be done with it.

Re:My Rights Online (1)

NG Resonance (794484) | about 10 years ago | (#10038116)

Since rights are being increasingly infringed in today's world, it is admirable that these abuses are being reported. People need to know. If these reports don't quite fit the category "My Rights Online", then so be it.

Judgement, anyone!?!? (2, Insightful)

Al Dimond (792444) | about 10 years ago | (#10037978)

Can these people not tell the difference between someone just wearing a shirt and a corporate-sponsored ambush? Telling people that they can't eat "restricted" sandwiches or drink a frappe sounds more like the spirit of Stalin than that of the Olympics.

Re:Judgement, anyone!?!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10038012)

yeah and at least Stalin was trying to make his country stronger and the world a better place. these guys are just after money and they know it.

that's why God will forgive Stalin much quicker than businessmen.

Re:Judgement, anyone!?!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10038085)

Telling people that they can't eat "restricted" sandwiches or drink a frappe sounds more like the spirit of Stalin than that of the Olympics.

Funny how laissez-faire capitalism and harsh authoritarianism can seem so similar at times, hmm? The only difference is whether the state or the private corporation makes the rules you follow, and tacitly support if you meekly go along for your own convenience.

Is there a new game in town? (1)

bman08 (239376) | about 10 years ago | (#10037979)

Is anybody making money on these games anymore? I haven't looked at the economics of it but, from an entertainment industry perspective, it seems to be a fear game. 'We must pay whatever it costs for the olympics because we always have.' Same with the advertisers. As far as I can tell, these games are a flop from the profit point of view. Everybody's losing.
What I'm thinking is, now that there's a world class venue in athens, start a new sanctioning body and a better run set of games that happen in greece every four years. Ditch all the politics and decades of aggragate crap rules and start over with sports.
Aw hell, it's a dream isn't it?

Heh, Funny (1)

illuminata (668963) | about 10 years ago | (#10037987)

I can see how some people might think this has to deal with "Your Rights", but how does this fall under "Your Rights Online"?

Are Sundays so slow that Slashdot now tries to give regular news?

Illegal usage of Olympic trademark (5, Funny)

davidfromoz (801492) | about 10 years ago | (#10037992)

Dear Slashdot,

I draw your attention to the inappropriate use of the words "Olympic" and "Pepsi" in the same article. Please remove this document immediately or you will be hearing from our lawyers.


My Fear (4, Interesting)

Bruha (412869) | about 10 years ago | (#10037997)

Is that this may spread to other venues, cant wear a metallica tshirt to ozzfest.

Cant attend a sporting event with the same rules even going as far as saying you cant wear a hockey jersey to football game.

How long will it be until a corporation begins to fund roads or parks and have security banning other advertisers.

It's bad enough I cant watch the superior coverage of the olympics legaly here in the USA due to similar contracts. Though I wonder how the advertisers would feel if people began to boycot them becuase one tv station banned them from consumer choice of BBC's olympics vs MicroSoft NBC Olympics.

no surprise (1)

holmengraa (542124) | about 10 years ago | (#10038000)

I remember a time when (idealistic?) organizations like the IOC would actually pretend to be about something else than money or branding. Or ambush prevention

Evil (1)

Spazmania (174582) | about 10 years ago | (#10038001)

Okay, so the IOC once again leads the way in corporate evil. If you think this is the lowest they'll go, you're in for more than a few surprises.

Athens 2004 Restricted Items and Actions (5, Informative)

daveschroeder (516195) | about 10 years ago | (#10038002)

More information:

"Advertisers try vaulting over the official games marketers" [] In 1996, Nike was the Cinderella of the Atlanta Olympics. Not invited to the ball, it made sure the shoe fit anyway.

The sneaker maker handed out swoosh-branded "Just Do It" signs, erected billboards and even built a makeshift sports complex -- leaving the patriotic impression that it was an official Olympic sponsor.

It wasn't. Archrival Reebok shelled out millions for bona fide sponsorship status. Nike glommed onto Olympic glory in a money-saving ploy known as ambush marketing.

"For pennies on the dollar, relative to the top sponsors, ambush marketing can be cost effective," said sports marketing expert David Carter. "Many consumers end up rather confused as to who the official Olympic sponsors are."

For what it's worth, from Num=61113 [] :

Known as the "clean venue policy", the rules were drawn up by the Greeks and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to shield sponsors from so-called "ambush marketing" -- an attempt to advertise items during the games without paying sponsorship fees.

The restrictions on food and drink are intended to ensure that only items made by official sponsors such as McDonald's and two Greek dairy firms are consumed at Olympic venues.

An official familiar with the restrictions said: "We have to protect official sponsors who have paid millions to make the Olympics happen. There will be cases of individual spectators being allowed in wearing a T-shirt bearing the logo of a rival sports brand but anyone who tries to practise ambush marketing will be removed."

And the actual list: []

The following items and actions are restricted at Olympic Venues:

Mopeds, bicycles, skates, skateboards

Electronic equipment of Non-Rights holding Broadcasting Organisations

Flags of non-participating countries. Flags of participating countries larger than 2x1 meters, banners (larger than 1x1 meters approximately). No banner may be hung in metallic, wooden or plastic poles or frames

Horns, laser devices and other devices that cause disturbance

Flag poles, logos, open umbrellas in seating areas, items (T-shirts, hats, bags, etc.) with distinctive trademarks of companies that are competitive to those of the sponsors

Pirate "Athens 2004" products

Leaflets, pamphlets, non-approved publications, unauthorised signs and labels, printed material for publishing purposes with religious, political, provocative or obscene content

Balls, rackets, Frisbees, and similar items, a large number of coins, lighters

Musical instruments, glass bottles, flasks, iceboxes, ice-bags, thermos, water, beverages, alcoholic drinks and material, in general, of any shape or content, or any other items that ATHOC in cooperation with the Security Authorities in charge, consider to be dangerous or inappropriate

Food (except for proven medical reasons)

Animals (except service animals)

Large items, large bags, suitcases, folding seats, small stools etc. (except in certain events)

Strollers in seating areas

Smoking or gambling

Collection of money for unauthorised purposes

Use or distribution of clothing and/or any type of material with the intent of advertising, promotion, raising money or making profit through unauthorised means

Ambush marketing

Demonstrations of a political or religious nature

Unauthorised ticket sales

Unauthorised sale of food

Unauthorised entry of TV presenters and unauthorised transmission and/or videotaping through transmission devices or mobile phones

Flash photography (in certain venues only)

Unauthorised entry to accredited areas

Dangerous, offensive or obscene behaviour, or actions that disturb other spectators
Prohibited items

Guns, explosive materials, chemical or incendiary mechanisms, tear gas, smoke bombs, knives, narcotic or other illegal substances, fireworks, firecrackers, poles, bats and in general items that may cause physical damage, even if they are legally possessed.

ATHOC reserves the right to modify this list at any time and from Venue to Venue.

Understated Point Missing (4, Insightful)

randyest (589159) | about 10 years ago | (#10038003)

"These tactics cut to the heart of the commercial viability of the Games, and represents one of their single biggest threats. Without guaranteeing exclusivity, it is harder to play competitive sponsors off against each other."

While worrying about "brand impurity" cutting to the "heart" of "commercial viability," they seem to have forgotten about the soul of the games.

Which is understandable, since to the promoters and "marketing protection squads," the games ceased long ago to be anything other than a way to make lots of profits.

When it becomes so bad that the majority of participants and spectators don't want to play a role in these little marketing games, it'll be too late. And that day is getting closer.

I'd be really upset about this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10038013)

...if I gave two shits about the Olympics or the Olympics even matters anymore. The Olympics long devolved from any relation to amateur athletics to a forum for rapid nationalism and advertisement. Go Lithuania!

Re:I'd be really upset about this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10038059)

Go Finland!

Fully justified (3, Insightful)

Aphelion (13231) | about 10 years ago | (#10038016)

From the article:

Nike's ambush of the 1996 Atlanta Olympics is still seen as the ambush of all ambushes. Saving the US$ 50 million that an official sponsorship would have cost, Nike plastered the city in billboards, handed out swoosh banners to wave at the competitions and erected an enormous Nike center overlooking the stadium. The tactics devastated the International Olympic Committee's credibility and spooked other organizations such as FIFA into adopting more assertive anti-ambushing strategies.

The article goes on to mention how Nike has never sponsored an entire event, and admits to "coming from a different angle" by sponsoring teams, press conferences even individual players. It's too bad that it has nothing specific to say about the Pepsi/Coca-Cola relationship.

Not justified (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10038104)

I thought capitalism included the freedom to act within the rules? Ambushing may circumvent intentions, but as long as Nike didn't break any laws, they didn't do anything wrong--right?

The IOC (1)

thephotoman (791574) | about 10 years ago | (#10038020)

Perhaps this is why there's such low interest in this year's Games. They've restricted the hell out of them such that we cannot enjoy them freely as we have in the past. As it is now, the Olympics are becoming less of a celebration of freedom and sport and more of an excercise in totalitarianism. What's next? Frisking people to make sure that the only credit card in their wallet is a Visa?

Relax, it's not that bad (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10038029)

They are just creating a set of rules so they can kick out the people who are doing guerilla marketing. They are not targetting random people who happen to wear a Nike t-shirt. I went to multiple Olympic events, I was carrying my Sony camcorder and wearing Nikes. My friend had a shirt with a huge Nike swoosh on it--not a hint of a problem. Sure, you can't bring your food in, but that's the same in any sports event or concert. Frankly, with Coke at 1Euro and bottled water at 0.50c in the stadium, I didn't miss the Pepsi or the "freedom" to bring my own.

Volunteers are a (slightly) different story. But they are in official uniform anyway, so it's more a matter of covering the "Sony" logo on their cameras and stuff.

I don't even watch summer games anymore... (1)

Homology (639438) | about 10 years ago | (#10038030)

What happend to the ideal of athletic competition? Sure, it's still in the charter, somewhere. But now I don't even watch the games anymore since it's has become a commercial yippo of corruption, drug abuse, cheating, money and nationalism (those athletes running around draped in their country's flag).

This news is a bit old... (1)

Robotech_Master (14247) | about 10 years ago | (#10038035)

The news actually came out via BoingBoing over a week ago...I wrote about it in my essay journal.

Have a Coke and a Smile...Or Else []

Re:This news is a bit old... (1)

Robotech_Master (14247) | about 10 years ago | (#10038092)

Whoops, hit submit before I could elaborate.

This hasn't just been happening in the Olympics, but in schools--remember the kid who got suspended for wearing a Pepsi shirt on Coke day? Oddly enough, this sort of thing was predicted ages ago by the satirical novel The Space Merchants (aka The Man Who Sold Venus) by Frederick Pohl and C.M. Kornbluth. Funny how what back then was satirical excess is today's standard order of business...

Just do it (1)

insulanus_hailstorm (804238) | about 10 years ago | (#10038036)

How dare those fans complain?

They are at the Olympic freakin' games! They should be lovin it. Why can't they catch the wave of human compassion, and let those corporations have a little fun, too?

Heck, if they are so opposed to a little increased mindshare, why don't they leave? They should just do it.

They shouldn't put up with being somewhere or doing something that doesn't make them happy. They should go everywhere they want to be, not where someone tells them to be. That way, they would be able to share moments. Share Life.

What do they want? To have it their way, right away?


The Olympic Partner Programme (TOP) []

How does this.... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10038040)

...affect my rights online?

Am I missing something?

correction to article (5, Interesting)

mqx (792882) | about 10 years ago | (#10038047)

2000: Qantas Airlines' slogan "Spirit of Australia" coincidentally sounds like games slogan "Share the spirit" to chagrin of official sponsor Ansett Air

Anyone who has lived in Australia can tell you that Qantas has used "Spirit of Australia" as an advertising slogan for at least 20 years or more. Not only that, but Qantas is one of those "grand old lady" organisations who don't stoop to any type of advertising/marketing "tricks". The reporter has actually made a mistake with this choice of example, because if anything, it would be Ansett with the wrongdoing here.

This has gone too far (1)

erroneus (253617) | about 10 years ago | (#10038048)

It's not like anyone can get the word out about this ridiculous travesty against the human tradition of the olympic games since it's the media that perpetrates this farce. But there must be some way.

I'm not a sports fan in the slightest and I really don't care much about the olympic games anyway, but there is something really wrong, greedy and perhaps even sinister going on there. It needs to be checked.

Nothing new (1)

Platinum Dragon (34829) | about 10 years ago | (#10038062)

Anyone remember this [] incident?

I can't find the bloody article, but I'm almost positive that this is not the first Olympics where the organizers decided sponsors had to be protected from the threat of a competing brand coming into the view of a camera or a visitor's eyes. I even think it was covered here on /., relating to either Sydney 2000 or Salt Lake City 2002. Someone with better search engine-wrangling skills than me want to help?

clean venues? (1)

Trepidity (597) | about 10 years ago | (#10038065)

Perhaps they ought to spend more time cleaning up drugs rather than logos?

well... (1)

sosuke (789685) | about 10 years ago | (#10038071)

they might have made it more apparent before attending the games, i didnt like it much when i couldnt wear explicit tshirts to middle school but i had to bite the bullet and conform, damn that sucks

no really the idea of advertising terrorism is just crazy, i agree that if we have to wear certain clothes that we should be comensated for it

this is just the next hit in my book against the olymics after the blogging ban, i think the reason that they wont let that happen could be because some of the abuse the atheletes put themselves though

that was my two cents

Are they missing a trick? (1)

sane? (179855) | about 10 years ago | (#10038079)

Just banning the products of those that haven't ponied up the bribe money would seem not to be sufficient.

After all, what is to stop a competitor (particularly a female competitor) who is sponsored by Nike from peeling off the offending Adidas clothing on the winning rostrum, grinding it beneath their heal, and telling the press it was a protest against oppression of the loathed Adidas brand? Instant negative publicity for the brand sponsor - and trouble for those in the Olympic cabal that OKed this corrupt idea.

In the end, if this is about business; then the inducements to win the publicity war for the individual by fighting against the big, bad, globalisation baddie to too large and juicy to ignore.

Time to step away, now. This road ends badly for the IOC.

Hmmm.. (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | about 10 years ago | (#10038082)

and my parents / friends always wondered why I could give a fuck about the Olympics....

Here's one more reason.


Like an amusement park... (3, Insightful)

LostCluster (625375) | about 10 years ago | (#10038089)

This is just like an amusement park that can control what they're going to let through their gates, even while charging $25 a person going through. The IOC is renting every olympic venue, so they get to set the rules as to what goes on there. If you don't like the rules, don't buy a ticket and don't go in the venues...

What it boils down to is the fact that the Olympics have lost their glow as a world gathering and now are just plain one big international TV game show production...

Re:Like an amusement park... (1)

faedle (114018) | about 10 years ago | (#10038129)


Except, I've never been asked to remove a Magic Mountain T-Shirt walking into Disneyland.

Topic: "The Almighty Buck" (1)

Alwin Henseler (640539) | about 10 years ago | (#10038094)

Please rename to "Greed". That seems more appropriate for many of the stories covered.

This is awesome (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10038095)

I want to beat the fucking shit out of you

Er, who'd want to wear that crap anyways (1)

realdpk (116490) | about 10 years ago | (#10038127)

Who'd want to wear a Pepsi brand shirt anyways? Every day I see people proudly wearing brand names on their clothing, but I do wonder if people would miss them if they suddenly weren't available for purchase.

What they're trying to prevent. (1, Redundant)

LostCluster (625375) | about 10 years ago | (#10038128)

You can say they may have too much security put up for brand protection at the Athens games, but they've already had a high profile failure... A man wearing a tutu and with the logo of a web-based casino paited on his chest jumped off a diving board into the pool at the diving venue. []

The web casino gets all sorts of free worldwide media coverage and they only had to pay the one guy a few hundred dollars... pretty good bang for the advertising buck for a company that has trouble buying ads in mainstream venues.

This is what the Olympic officials most want to avoid. They've got sponsors paying for the right to be associated with the games, and they don't want anybody taking a free ride on their publicity.

Importing this practice into the U.S. (1)

myke113 (629375) | about 10 years ago | (#10038131)

How long until this practice is imported into the U.S.? Couldn't the Slashdot crowd make a dent by boycotting all companies involved in this bullshit and spreading the word to others to do the same? We need some good anti-marketing going.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>